The Road to Hell...
Well, in yet another well-intentioned, poorly thought-out piece of legislation, our government has banned the slaughter of horses for meat. I'm not real familiar with the legislation--I was informed about it by my friend, Marla...so I really don't understand what the logic was behind the concept in the first place. I do know that groups like PETA and ALF were major players in getting it passed.
The backwash of consequences has already begun. Marla had a brand inspector out at her place the other day, preparing ownership transfer papers on some animals she's bought or sold, as well as the foals from the past couple of years that are now getting old enough to get ownership papers finalized (they don't like to do transfer papers on young horses, because one of the details on the paper is the size of the horse...which can change in a couple of weeks on a growing foal).
The Inspector told her, since the legislation passed, he has had six horses mysteriously appear at the auction area managed by the state--horses which would likely have gone to slaughter, but their owners could no longer afford to keep them and couldn't find anyone to buy them. It will only get worse.
Now, before anyone jumps on my back about this--I own horses. I would, and have, gone without on multiple occasions in order to provide for them. I spent most of a winter driving from Logan to Hyrum, twice a day, because that was where I could afford to pasture my horse. Every time I was there, I had to chip the ice off her water tank, and stick my hands in freezing cold water on numerous occasions to pull out large chunks of ice so the tank wouldn't freeze over as quickly. I've suffered for my horses, sacrificed for them...and the last thing in the world I want is to get rid of them.
But if left with a choice between simply disposing of them, or having them serve SOME purpose, I'd like to think that they continued to serve SOME purpose once their life was done. I don't think it's the government's business to tell me I can't sell them for slaughter, any more than it's the government's business to tell laboratories that they can no longer use rats for research. I would rather sell off everything I own and live out of my friend's basement than send them to slaughter--but not every horse owner has the kind of friends and support that I do.
The Bureau of Land Management cannot, currently, find homes for all of the mustangs they round up each year. Most horse owners, in this area, are only a step or two ahead of being completely broke, themselves. In the past five years, two major breeding stables in Utah have gone out of business. These are people who had extra money to raise horses...the exception to the rule around here. Many of us, as owners, devote a fair amount of our work and income to providing for the horses--it is an incredible few that manage to get their horses to make money for them. An unstable job market and economy doesn't provide much security for those that are staying only a few hundred dollars ahead of their collective bills, between feeding themselves, their families, and their animals.
Marla had a 'rescue horse' in her herd, an old gelding that her cousin had owned for years. Her cousin could no longer afford to feed and board him, and debated what to do with him (this was before the ban). Finally, she gave him to Marla, not willing to have him put down yet (despite the fact that he was chronically lame). Marla had him for most of a year. In that year, she spent, in vet bills alone, as much on that horse as she spent on feed for the other ten, combined. That doesn't include the special feed she got for him, or the extra time she spent working with him to try and find a solution for his lameness. When he finally got to the point where he couldn't even walk anymore, she called the vet and had him put down. Then she had to find someone to come take the carcass away, or get a permit and find someone with a backhoe to bury him in the pasture. Between putting him down and getting the body removed (which was cheaper than burial), he cost her an additional $300--enough to feed her family for two months.
The intention of the legislation may have been to prevent suffering among horses...and thousands of horses a year will no longer meet their end at a meat-packing plant, to become glue, dog food, and other products. Among those thousands, many will instead suffer a slow, wasting death, too old to move around enough to eat, or trapped in a pasture with insufficient feed, owned by people who had to choose between feeding themselves or feeding the horses. I don't know if any of you have ever been around old, crippled, suffering horses...but you can see it, in their motion, their body language...in their deep sighs of pain and their eyes.
In very much the same way that a few radical neoconservatives manufactured an imminent threat to the well-being of the world in Iraq, a few radical animal-rights-activists have manufactured an image of an industry dedicated to cruel treatment and slow starvation of animals waiting to die (never mind the fact that starving the horses means less flesh per animal, resulting in less product--it just doesn't make economic sense, even). And a bunch of soft-living fat-cats, totally removed from the reality of the situation, have again supported the lie. Lives will be lost, suffering will ensue...
I hope that sits well with those who've claimed the moral high ground.
Well, in yet another well-intentioned, poorly thought-out piece of legislation, our government has banned the slaughter of horses for meat. I'm not real familiar with the legislation--I was informed about it by my friend, Marla...so I really don't understand what the logic was behind the concept in the first place. I do know that groups like PETA and ALF were major players in getting it passed.
The backwash of consequences has already begun. Marla had a brand inspector out at her place the other day, preparing ownership transfer papers on some animals she's bought or sold, as well as the foals from the past couple of years that are now getting old enough to get ownership papers finalized (they don't like to do transfer papers on young horses, because one of the details on the paper is the size of the horse...which can change in a couple of weeks on a growing foal).
The Inspector told her, since the legislation passed, he has had six horses mysteriously appear at the auction area managed by the state--horses which would likely have gone to slaughter, but their owners could no longer afford to keep them and couldn't find anyone to buy them. It will only get worse.
Now, before anyone jumps on my back about this--I own horses. I would, and have, gone without on multiple occasions in order to provide for them. I spent most of a winter driving from Logan to Hyrum, twice a day, because that was where I could afford to pasture my horse. Every time I was there, I had to chip the ice off her water tank, and stick my hands in freezing cold water on numerous occasions to pull out large chunks of ice so the tank wouldn't freeze over as quickly. I've suffered for my horses, sacrificed for them...and the last thing in the world I want is to get rid of them.
But if left with a choice between simply disposing of them, or having them serve SOME purpose, I'd like to think that they continued to serve SOME purpose once their life was done. I don't think it's the government's business to tell me I can't sell them for slaughter, any more than it's the government's business to tell laboratories that they can no longer use rats for research. I would rather sell off everything I own and live out of my friend's basement than send them to slaughter--but not every horse owner has the kind of friends and support that I do.
The Bureau of Land Management cannot, currently, find homes for all of the mustangs they round up each year. Most horse owners, in this area, are only a step or two ahead of being completely broke, themselves. In the past five years, two major breeding stables in Utah have gone out of business. These are people who had extra money to raise horses...the exception to the rule around here. Many of us, as owners, devote a fair amount of our work and income to providing for the horses--it is an incredible few that manage to get their horses to make money for them. An unstable job market and economy doesn't provide much security for those that are staying only a few hundred dollars ahead of their collective bills, between feeding themselves, their families, and their animals.
Marla had a 'rescue horse' in her herd, an old gelding that her cousin had owned for years. Her cousin could no longer afford to feed and board him, and debated what to do with him (this was before the ban). Finally, she gave him to Marla, not willing to have him put down yet (despite the fact that he was chronically lame). Marla had him for most of a year. In that year, she spent, in vet bills alone, as much on that horse as she spent on feed for the other ten, combined. That doesn't include the special feed she got for him, or the extra time she spent working with him to try and find a solution for his lameness. When he finally got to the point where he couldn't even walk anymore, she called the vet and had him put down. Then she had to find someone to come take the carcass away, or get a permit and find someone with a backhoe to bury him in the pasture. Between putting him down and getting the body removed (which was cheaper than burial), he cost her an additional $300--enough to feed her family for two months.
The intention of the legislation may have been to prevent suffering among horses...and thousands of horses a year will no longer meet their end at a meat-packing plant, to become glue, dog food, and other products. Among those thousands, many will instead suffer a slow, wasting death, too old to move around enough to eat, or trapped in a pasture with insufficient feed, owned by people who had to choose between feeding themselves or feeding the horses. I don't know if any of you have ever been around old, crippled, suffering horses...but you can see it, in their motion, their body language...in their deep sighs of pain and their eyes.
In very much the same way that a few radical neoconservatives manufactured an imminent threat to the well-being of the world in Iraq, a few radical animal-rights-activists have manufactured an image of an industry dedicated to cruel treatment and slow starvation of animals waiting to die (never mind the fact that starving the horses means less flesh per animal, resulting in less product--it just doesn't make economic sense, even). And a bunch of soft-living fat-cats, totally removed from the reality of the situation, have again supported the lie. Lives will be lost, suffering will ensue...
I hope that sits well with those who've claimed the moral high ground.
posted by Curtis at 4:23 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home